Will,I think your'e right.. the BSD community's goal is to have a fully BSD licensed system.. including the compiler. So, as it stands now, FreeBSD at least, uses some GPL licensed tools because there's no equivalent BSD licensed alternative. But this is happening slowly but surely. For example FreeBSD recently switched back to a BSD licensed version of tar(1), which effectively matches gnutar's features.

Within the CVS repository, GPL'd tools are separated from the rest of the system. I suspect one day we may once again return to a BSD licensed compiler as well.

Rasterman maybe just doesn't realize how important the license is to avid BSD users. So, in summary, all else being equal, a tool that's BSD licensed is certainly preferred.

Having a fully BSD licensed system is crucial. The whole point of BSD is to be usable everywhere, even evil monopolies. Without a BSD compiler, it's not truely free as in libre and gratas. GPL is sposed to be the most free license, but simply requiring the developer to meet certain distribution requirements goes against that pure freedom we all seek. Avid or not BSD != GPL, and the GPL is a pain in the tush.